Abel to Yzerman

"Little House" never scared me. Sure, when Mary went blind and that little skank Nellie started tricking on her 16th birthday? Disturbing. But never scared, really. It wasn't a scary show. It was family. It was Pa battling a few broken ribs to protect the clan from savage rats. It was Mr. Angel, wasted on corn whiskey but lovable. It was Albert with the lisp stoned to the bejesus belt on morphine up in the hay loft.

The Ingalls sisters stayed grounded. And we loved them for it. But they never had to deal with the likes of a really bad man.

Well, tonite they do. Tonite, Little House is back in a stirring return on FS-Detroit, brought to you by the Bernstein Law Firm and that idiotic sports store who claims "the strike is over." And don't you think for a second it's going to be all giggles and light. No.

The Ingalls sisters leave the innocence of Walnut Grove and travel east to the mean streets of Detroit. It's there that Mary and Laura, together again because they each have agents now, find out that the world can be much more cruel and sinister than just the leering gaze of Nels Olsen at the tail end of a barn dance. Tonite, it's the Ingalls sisters battling a serial killer, a sociopath, a wacked out toothless bearded bastard who wreaked havoc in the Rockies ten years ago and hasn't stopped killing since.

Little Half Pint and her blind dimwitted sister Mary take to the ice in Detroit tonite, a place they could have called home had they not elected to live together in harmony and song for the rest of their Cup-less lives.

Bring it ladies. Our Serial Killer awaits and his brain is squirming like a frigging toad. It's a live blog, bitches.

Posted by
TheRealYooper
from within sight of the edge of the Earth. on 01/25/13 at 11:38 PM ET

Good one(!) Don’t know how many would catch that. Speaking of which, where is our San Diego cohort?
I saw today where the DC Circuit slammed the administration today in unanimous decision (the DC circuit!).
Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Looking for a “D” man on 01/25/13 at 10:35 PM ET

Rummy was hanging out here last game.

The DC circuit smacked down the Presidency. O, W and virtually every President have used recess appointments. Wonder if the Supremes will take it up. The administration I’m sure will appeal it.

I saw today where the DC Circuit slammed the administration today in unanimous decision (the DC circuit!).

unreal eh?

Posted by
TheRealYooper
from within sight of the edge of the Earth. on 01/25/13 at 11:42 PM ET

Three Stars

First Star
Pavel Datsyuk

Red Wings - C
Goals: 1
Assists: 2

2nd Star
T. Bertuzzi
Todd Bertuzzi

Red Wings - RW
Goals: 2
Assists: 0

3rd Star
Z. Parise
Zach Parise

Wild - LW
Goals: 2
Assists: 0

Posted by
TheRealYooper
from within sight of the edge of the Earth. on 01/25/13 at 11:46 PM ET

unreal eh?
Posted by TheRealYooper from within sight of the edge of the Earth. on 01/25/13 at 10:42 PM ET

Not really. IIRC most of the DC Circuit were appointed by conservative republican asministrations.

At least one of W’s minions disagreed with the opinion”

“If this opinion stands, I think it will fundamentally alter the balance between the Senate and the president by limiting the president’s ability to keep offices filled,” said John P. Elwood, who handled recess appointment issues for the Justice Department during the administration of President George W. Bush. “This is certainly a red-letter day in presidential appointment power.”

I have no idea why we are talking about this here, but it does not seem overtly political (i.e., it can be discussed in a non-partisan manner), so here goes (I’m not a lawyer, so I would be so bold as to offer my opinion in this crowd is anyone’s guess).

Presidents from both parties have made hundreds of recess appointments when the Senate has failed to act on nominations. Ronald Reagan holds the record with 243. Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, made 105, and it was during his term that Senate Democrats began holding pro-forma sessions, some lasting less than a minute, when the Senate went on break. They contended that that kept the Senate in session and did not allow Bush to make recess appointments.

Republicans took up the practice when Obama was elected. But Obama decided to challenge it in January 2012, when the Senate was on a 20-day holiday but holding pro-forma sessions every three business days to block presidential action.

It seems like it would be the Senate (a minority of Senators at that. What a weird body with such weird rules. Protecting the rights of minorities is critical in democracy, but who came up with minority rule in a legislative body?) that would get “smacked down” in this case, not the President. If the pro-forma sessions only purpose is to promote the obvious fiction that the Senate is in session, thus preventing the President from exercising his Constitutional authority/duty to make recess appointments, wouldn’t it be those sessions that are unconstitutional? Surely there must be a legal principle represented here, something along the lines of separation of powers. “The President can make recess appointments, but not if we pretend to be in session. Let’s pretend to be in session just to prevent him from exercising his authority!” “We’re not in recess, we’re on lunch. A really, really long lunch.” “Recess doesn’t begin until the lunch lady says, and we fired the lunch lady due to budget cuts. Nana nana boo boo.” Preposterous.

About Abel to Yzerman

Welcome to Abel to Yzerman, a Red Wing blog since 1977. No other site on the internet has better-researched, fact-laden and better prepared discussions than A2Y. Re-phrase: we do little research, find facts and stats highly overrated and claim little to no preparation. There are 19 readers of A2Y. No more, no less. All of them, except maybe one, are juvenile in nature. Reminding them of that in the comment section will only encourage them to prove that. Your suggestions and critiques are welcome: wphoulihan@gmail.com